BOSTON GLOBE: "(Romney) ended the week trying to explain a discrepancy between assertion and fact... It hurt because it's a reminder of discrepancies between assertion and fact when it comes to Romney's overall conservative credentials." http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2007/04/08/guns_trust_and_romney

EYE ON 08.COM: "This is important because it goes to character. Romney struggles to tell the truth and keep his story straight about basic facts about his own life. He also struggles to keep his story straight on issues like abortion, gay rights, taxes, guns... It is clear what Romney is doing. He is just making it up as he goes along. He is making himself up as he goes along."

BOSTON GLOBE: "Mitt Romney went a step further in a 1978 interview with the Boston Herald. Talking about the Mormon Church and racial discrimination, he said: 'My father and I marched with Martin Luther King Jr. through the streets of Detroit.' Yesterday, Romney spokesman Eric Fehrnstrom acknowledged that was not true. 'Mitt Romney did not march with Martin Luther King,' he said in an e-mail statement to the Globe."

ROMNEY SAID HIS DEVOUTLY RELIGIOUS MOTHER CAMPAIGNED FOR ABORTION RIGHTS. SHE DIDN'T.

BOSTON GLOBE: "(Former Michigan Republican Party chairwoman Elly) Peterson is dumbfounded to hear that Mitt Romney has described his mother as having been an abortion rights supporter during (her 1970 U.S. Senate) campaign. 'If it happened, I'd remember it,' she said in a telephone interview. 'It didn't, and I don't.' ...Lenore Romney's campaign stance is relevant only because her son...raised it in 1994 during a debate with Senator Edward M. Kennedy, and he has been sending mixed signals on abortion ever since. 'I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country,' he said in 1994. 'I have since the time that my mom took that position when she ran in 1970 as a U.S. Senate candidate.' ...Detroit Free Press archives yielded no (Lenore Romney) campaign references to abortion...'The idea that Lenore would defy her church is hard to believe,' Peterson said."

http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2005/06/26/evolving_history

---

ROMNEY SAID: "I WASN'T PRO-CHOICE."

ROMNEY SAID: "I WAS PRO-CHOICE."

WHICH IS IT, MITT?

FOX NEWS SUNDAY: "I never called myself pro-choice. I never allowed myself to use the word 'pro-choice,' because I didn't feel I was pro-choice. I would protect the law, I said, as it was, but I wasn't pro-choice."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,293017,00.html

ASSOCIATED PRESS: "I think I've made it very clear. I was pro-choice, or effectively pro-choice, when I ran in 1994 (and 2002)."

ROMNEY SAID HE WAS ENDORSED BY THE NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION. HE WASN'T.

WASHINGTON POST: "Under Russert's grilling about guns on this morning's 'Meet the Press,' former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney claimed an endorsement he'd never won. ...'I also was pleased to have the support of the NRA when I ran for governor. I sought it, I seek it now. ...I told you what my position was, and what I did as governor; the fact that I received the endorsement of the NRA.' The problem? He was never endorsed by the NRA ... 'The NRA did not endorse in the 2002 campaign,' said (Romney campaign) spokesman Kevin Madden, when asked about Romney's comments."

BOSTON GLOBE: "'I have a gun of my own. I go hunting myself. I'm a member of the NRA and believe firmly in the right to bear arms,' Romney said. Asked by reporters at the gun show Friday whether he personally owned the gun, Romney said he did not." http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/01/14/romney_retreats_on_gun_control

---

ROMNEY SAID HE'S HUNTED "ALL MY LIFE." ONCE EVERY 40 YEARS, THAT IS.

BOSTON GLOBE: "This week in Keene, N.H., Romney told a man in an NRA hat that he had 'been a hunter pretty much all of my life,' the Associated Press reported. The Romney campaign later acknowledged that Romney, 60, hunted one summer as a teenager and once in his late 50's."

Willard recently told Qaty al-Khouriq that a hidden camera had been used on his WHO interview—which was a lie—and the host (Jan Mickelson) has been setting the record straight all week. The show reaches almost all of Iowa and is very popular.

Jan Mickelson is an intellectual giant, a true conservative, and an honest man.

Mitt Romney may be “smart,” in the worldly sense of the word, but that intellect is wasted in the service of evil. Mitt is the most dishonest man in the history of American politics, as far as I’m concerned.

I suspect you've already seen the Google video of Slick Willard on Mickelson. It's interesting to watch him because, even though the camera is three feet away, he forgets it's on and speaks/acts candidly.

I was instantly reminded of the hair-splitting prevarications of Slick Willie, finger in the camera, saying "I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky..." or a dozen other red-faced rants from the original slickster.

Beagle8U said: "He claims to support the 2nd Amendment AND an assault weapons ban in the same sentence...lol. It just dont get any stupider that that!"

Also, Romney signed a bill which fixed what I consider a fatal flaw in the Massachusetts assault weapons ban. The existing law referenced the federal law which was due to expire without explicitly providing validity despite the expiration.

I don't believe any court could have enforced such a law. Romney fixed it so that it could be enforced and even had the NRA compromise to get it done.

Deadly assault weapons have no place in Massachusetts. These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense. They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people.

As someone who visited Charlton Heston at his home twice, named my firstborn son after him, and was endorsed by the NRA every time I ran for office, I think Im pretty well-informed about the organization.

Beagle8U said: I wouldnt call that a fix unless you mean fixed it for the gun grabbers.

That's exactly what I meant, of course.

One need only ask, "Why did the anti-gunners support the bill?" I don't see the anti-gunners helping to ease the burden on law-abiding citizens here in Kalifornia. The only thing in that bill for the anti-gunners was the essential patch to their gun-grabbing bill.

And anybody who claims the "grandfathering" of present owners means this is not a "grab" is fooling themselves.

There will be people like me who refuse to register a gun that is already in my safe. I had to export some of my rifles to a free state. Even today I can't fire my $2000 AR-10 target rifle.

Then there is the fact that nobody can buy such guns after the passage of the infringement. My friends and family who could benefit from my advice on what arms are suitable for their use, are unable to own the very weapons that I am familiar with and recommend.

And the final insult is that the state has outlawed inheritance by my children of the infringed arms. If I really still "owned" these rifles, then I would be able to pass them on to my children with the rest of my estate. That is now outlawed.

The anti-gunners only survive because it is illegal to treat them as they deserve to be treated.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.